Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD YASEEN versus STATE

Appreciation of Section 9 (c) drug possession evidence There was no material contradiction, improvement or exaggeration in the evidence of the prosecution's witnesses to create enmity or hatred by the raiding party of the permanent and unarmed accused anti-narcotics force. I failed. The report of the chemical auditor was positive by falsely implicating him; the travel documents, which were the first culprit to be released from the accused, appeared at the airport to prove that the accused had followed the guidelines set by the Supreme Court in the first guilty verdict. The trial court had already softened the sentence. Because the trial was reasonable and concise, intervention was not guaranteed.

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011

• ZURASH INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD. through Director v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Interior, Islamabad 2011 CLD 511
• Mrs. FARIDA HANIF v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Interior Affairs, Islamabad 2011 CLC 511
• ABDUL JABBAR MEMON v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ports and Shipping Government of Pakistan 2011 PLC(CS) 513
• Dr. NAHEED FATIMA v. PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIR CORPORATION (PIAC) through Chairman 2011 PLD 514
• CHEC-MILLWALA DREDGING CO. (PVT..) LTD. v. ALLIED BANK OF PAKISTAN LTD. 2011 PLD 521
• REZA IQBAL v. ROYAL GROUP 2011 PLD 524
• CHAKAR JAFFARI v. State 2011 MLD 524
• AS ENTERPRISES v. NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN 2011 CLD 529

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2011 →

property advocates from Abbaspur lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes